Добавил:
Sekretar
kiopkiopkiop18@yandex.ru
t.me/Prokururor I Вовсе не секретарь, но почту проверяю
Опубликованный материал нарушает ваши авторские права? Сообщите нам.
Вуз:
Предмет:
Файл:Ординатура / Хирургия / Библиотека им академика М.И. Перельмана / Книга_1157_Библиотеки_им_академика_М_И_Перельмана.pdf
X
- •Preface
- •1. Anatomy and Physiology of the Breast
- •Development of the Breast
- •Embryology
- •Development during Puberty
- •Anatomy of the Adult Breast
- •Muscular Anatomy of the Chest Wall
- •Vascular Anatomy
- •Lymphatic Anatomy
- •Anatomy of the Axilla
- •Physiology of the Breast
- •Hormones Affecting the Breast
- •Estrogen
- •Progesterone
- •Prolactin
- •Oxytocin
- •Human Placental Lactogen
- •The Breast during the Menstrual Cycle
- •Follicular Phase
- •Luteal Phase
- •Menstruation
- •The Breast after Menopause
- •The Breast during Pregnancy
- •Fascia of the Breast and Chest Wall
- •Neural Anatomy of the Breastand Chest Wall
- •Lactation
- •Suggested Readings
- •2. Principles of Breast Cancer Screening
- •Modalities of Breast Imaging
- •Mammography
- •Technique
- •Digital Mammography
- •Indications and Uses
- •Screening
- •Diagnostic Mammography
- •Guidance of Interventional Procedures
- •Ultrasound
- •Technique
- •Indications and Uses
- •Diagnostic Evaluation of a Breast Mass
- •Local and Regional Staging
- •Guidance of Interventional Procedures
- •Magnetic Resonance Imaging
- •Technique
- •Indications and Uses
- •Imaging of Silicone Breast Implants
- •The Occult Primary Breast Cancer
- •Assessing Candidacy for Breast Conservation
- •Screening
- •Response to Neoadjuvant Therapy
- •Follow-up of Breast Cancer Patients
- •Positron Emission Tomography
- •Technique
- •Indications and Uses
- •Principles of Breast Cancer Screening
- •Screening for Breast Cancer
- •Suggested Reading
- •3. The Breast Mass, Breast Biopsies, and Benign Lesions of the Breast
- •Evaluation
- •History
- •Physical Examination
- •Directed Breast Imaging
- •Triple Diagnosis
- •Breast Biopsies of Palpable Lesions
- •Fine-Needle Aspiration
- •Procedure
- •Core-Needle Biopsy
- •Procedure
- •Excisional Biopsy
- •Incisional Biopsy
- •Breast Biopsies of Nonpalpable Lesions
- •Ultrasound-Guided Biopsy
- •Stereotactic Core-Needle Biopsy
- •Wire-Localized Excisional Biopsy
- •MRI-Guided Biopsy
- •Management of Benign Breast Masses
- •Fibroadenoma
- •Cysts
- •Lipoma
- •Hamartoma
- •Trauma/Hematoma/Fat Necrosis
- •Diabetic Mastopathy
- •Sclerosing Adenosis and Radial Scar
- •Papilloma and Papillomatosis
- •Suggested Readings
- •4. Breast Pain and Fibrocystic Disease
- •Etiology of Cyclic Mastalgia
- •Evaluation of Breast Pain
- •Clinical Evaluation of the Patient with Nipple Discharge
- •Treatment Options
- •Reassurance
- •Nonhormonal Therapies
- •Hormonal Therapies
- •Surgery for Mastalgia
- •Suggested Readings
- •5. Management of Nipple Discharge
- •Nipple Aspirate Fluid in the Nonlactating Breast
- •Abnormal Discharge of the Nipple
- •Endocrine Causes of Nipple Discharge
- •Breast Conditions Causing Nipple Discharge
- •Ductal Lavage and Ductoscopy
- •Duct Excision
- •Suggested Readings
- •6. Infectious and Inflammatory Diseases of the Breast
- •Mastitis
- •Management
- •Breast Abscess
- •Recurring Subareolar Abscess
- •Pathophysiology
- •Workup
- •Treatment
- •Granulomatous Mastitis
- •Suggested Readings
- •7. Gynecomastia
- •Etiology
- •Genetic Disorders
- •Malignancy
- •Thyroid Disorders
- •Liver Disease
- •Renal Failure
- •Drugs
- •HIV-Positive Men
- •Evaluation
- •History and Physical
- •Mammography
- •Biopsy
- •Laboratory Evaluation
- •Treatment
- •Medical Therapy
- •Surgery
- •Suggested Readings
- •8. Identifying and Managing the High-Risk Patient
- •Risk Factors for Breast Cancer
- •Hereditary Risk Factors
- •Race
- •Family History
- •Genetic Mutations
- •BRCA1 and BRCA2
- •p53 (Li-Fraumeni Syndrome)
- •ATM (Ataxia Telangiectasia)
- •PTEN (Cowden Syndrome)
- •STK11 (Peutz-Jeghers Syndrome)
- •Menstrual and Reproductive Factors
- •Age at Menarche
- •Age at Menopause
- •Pregnancy
- •Hormone Levels
- •Hormone Replacement Therapy
- •Oral Contraceptives
- •Dietary Factors
- •Height and Weight
- •Physical Activity
- •Specific Foods
- •Factors Related to the Breast
- •Previous History of Breast Cancer
- •Breast Density
- •Breast-Feeding
- •Proliferative Lesions without Atypia
- •Proliferative Lesions with Atypia (Atypical Hyperplasia and Lobular Carcinoma in Situ)
- •Other Factors
- •Statistical Models to Estimate the Risk of Breast Cancer
- •Gail and Claus Models
- •What Can I Do to Decrease My Risk?
- •Lifestyle Changes
- •Chemoprevention
- •Aspirin
- •Tamoxifen
- •Who Should Be Considered for Tamoxifen Chemoprevention?
- •Women with LCIS, ALH, or ADH
- •Women with a Family History of Breast Cancer
- •Women with BRCA1 and BRCA2 Mutation
- •Women with a High Risk of Breast Cancer Based on Their Gail Model
- •Raloxifene
- •Aromatase Inhibitors
- •Surgery
- •Prophylactic Mastectomy
- •Prophylactic Oophorectomy
- •Management of the Patient with Lobular Carcinoma In Situ
- •Management of the Patient with a BRCA Mutation
- •Increased Surveillance
- •Breast Examination
- •Mammogram
- •Ultrasonography
- •Magnetic Resonance Imaging
- •Other
- •Risk Reduction Strategies
- •Tamoxifen
- •Bilateral Prophylactic Mastectomy
- •Risk-Reducing Salpingo-Oophorectomy
- •Suggested Readings
- •9. Reading the Pathology Report
- •Histology
- •Invasive Ductal Carcinoma
- •Invasive Lobular Carcinoma
- •Tubular Carcinoma
- •Cribriform Carcinoma
- •Medullary Carcinoma
- •Mucinous Carcinoma
- •Papillary Carcinoma
- •Secretory Carcinoma
- •Metaplastic Carcinoma
- •Other Forms of Breast Cancer
- •Tumor Size
- •Margin Status
- •Grade
- •Hormone Receptor and Her-2/neu Expression
- •Lymphovascular Invasion
- •Extensive Intraductal Component
- •Suggested Readings
- •10. Workup and Staging of the Breast Cancer Patient
- •Breast Cancer Staging
- •T Stage
- •N Stage
- •M Stage
- •Other Information Not Included in Staging
- •Genetic Counseling
- •Presentation at a Multidisciplinary Tumor Board
- •Suggested Readings
- •11. Management of Ductal Carcinoma In Situ and Paget Disease
- •Incidence
- •Natural History
- •Classification
- •Presentation
- •Treatment
- •Mastectomy
- •Breast Conservation Therapy
- •Lumpectomy Alone for DCIS
- •Hormonal Therapy
- •Paget Disease
- •Clinical Presentation
- •Treatment
- •Paget Disease with Palpable Mass or Mammographic Abnormality
- •Paget Disease with No Mass or Mammographic Findings
- •Suggested Readings
- •12. Surgical Management of Primary Breast Cancer
- •Changes in Surgical Management of Breast Cancer
- •Breast Conserving Therapy
- •Patient Selection
- •Absolute Contraindications
- •Relative Contraindications
- •Not Contraindications
- •Operative Management of Breast Cancer
- •Lumpectomy
- •Placement of the Incision
- •Lumpectomy
- •Wound Closure
- •Wire-Localized Lumpectomy
- •Reexcision Lumpectomy
- •Lumpectomy in the Prosthetically Augmented Breast
- •Postoperative Care after Lumpectomy
- •Simple Mastectomy
- •Modified Radical Mastectomy
- •Postoperative Care
- •Complications of Breast Surgery
- •Wound Infections
- •Seroma
- •Hematoma/Bleeding
- •Chronic Pain
- •Chronic Breast Lymphedema/Cellulitis
- •Suggested Readings
- •13. Regional Management of Breast Cancer
- •Introduction
- •Management of the Patient with Clinically Node-Negative Breast Cancer
- •Noninvasive Axillary Assessment
- •Axillary Ultrasound
- •Contraindications to Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy
- •Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy
- •Surgical Technique
- •Injection of Tracers and Patient Preparation
- •Lymphoscintigraphy
- •Sentinel Lymphadenectomy
- •Intraoperative Evaluation of the Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy
- •Postoperative Care of the Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy
- •Histopathologic Examination of the Sentinel Lymph Node
- •Management of the Clinically Positive Axilla
- •Axillary Lymph Node Dissection
- •Technique
- •Patient Position
- •Procedure
- •Postoperative Care
- •Management of the Internal Mammary Lymph Nodes
- •Internal Mammary Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy
- •Internal Mammary Node Dissection
- •Is Axillary Lymph Node Dissection Necessary for a Positive Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy?
- •Complications Associated with Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy
- •Inability to Find the Sentinel Node
- •Allergic Reaction to Blue Dye
- •Surgical Complications of Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy
- •Complications of Axillary Lymph Node Dissection
- •Nerve Injuries
- •Cording or Limited Range of Motion
- •Lymphedema
- •Management of Lymphedema
- •Risk Reduction
- •Treatment
- •Suggested Readings
- •14. Principles of Breast Reconstruction
- •Types of Breast Reconstruction
- •Expander/Implants
- •Reconstruction with Autologous Tissues
- •Transverse Rectus Abdominis Myocutaneous Flaps
- •Pedicled Transverse Rectus Abdominis Myocutaneous Flap Procedure
- •Free Transverse Rectus Abdominis Myocutaneous Flaps
- •Deep Inferior Epigastric Perforator and Superficial Inferior Epigastric Artery (Perforator) Flaps
- •Extended Latissimus Dorsi Flaps
- •Gluteal Artery Perforator Flaps
- •Superior Gluteal Artery Perforator Flap
- •Inferior Gluteal Artery Perforator Flap
- •The Skin-Sparing Mastectomy
- •Nipple and Areolar Reconstruction
- •Treatment of the Contralateral Breast
- •Timing of Breast Reconstruction
- •Breast Irradiation and Reconstruction
- •Effects of Irradiating a Tissue Expander/Implants
- •Effects of Irradiating the Autologous Flap
- •Effects of Placing a Prosthesis after Irradiation
- •Effects of Performing an Autologous Flap after Irradiation
- •Sentinel Node Biopsy and Reconstruction
- •Oncoplastic Approaches to Lumpectomy
- •Suggested Readings
- •15. Principles of Radiation Therapy for Primary Breast Cancer
- •Introduction
- •How Does Radiation Kill Cancer?
- •Benefit of Radiation Therapy in Breast Cancer
- •Breast Conservation Therapy
- •Lumpectomy without Radiation
- •Postmastectomy Radiation
- •Delivery of Radiation to the Breast and Chest Wall
- •Complications of Breast and Chest Wall Radiation
- •Partial Breast Irradiation
- •Interstitial Brachytherapy
- •Balloon-Catheter Brachytherapy
- •External Beam Radiation
- •Intraoperative Radiation Therapy
- •Suggested Readings
- •16. Principles of Adjuvant Chemotherapy for Breast Cancer
- •Introduction
- •Principles of Adjuvant Chemotherapy
- •Benefits of Adjuvant Chemotherapy in Breast Cancer
- •Selection of Patients for Adjuvant Chemotherapy
- •Consensus Groups
- •National Institutes of Health Consensus Conference
- •National Comprehensive Cancer Network
- •St. Gallen International Consensus Panel
- •Adjuvant Online
- •Microarray Analysis and the Oncotype DX Assay
- •Chemotherapeutic Agents Used in Breast Cancer
- •Anthracycline-Based Regimens
- •Taxanes
- •Mechanism of Action
- •Taxanes in the Adjuvant Setting
- •Herceptin
- •Dose-Dense Chemotherapy
- •High-Dose Chemotherapy with Autologous Stem Cell Support
- •Side Effects of Chemotherapy
- •Short-Term Toxicity
- •Hair Loss (Alopecia)
- •Nausea and Vomiting
- •Myelosuppression
- •Neurologic Toxicity
- •Weight Gain and Fatigue
- •Long-Term Effects
- •Cognitive Dysfunction
- •Ovarian Failure
- •Cardiac Toxicity
- •Leukemia and Myelodysplastic Syndromes
- •On the Horizon
- •Suggested Readings
- •17. Principles of Adjuvant Hormonal Therapy
- •The Estrogen Receptor
- •Estrogen Receptor-Alpha versus Estrogen Receptor-Beta Expression
- •Progesterone Receptor Expression
- •Estrogen and Breast Cancer
- •Selective Estrogen Receptor Modulators
- •Tamoxifen
- •Benefits of Tamoxifen in the Adjuvant Setting
- •Relapse and Mortality
- •Risks of Tamoxifen
- •Raloxifene
- •Aromatase Inhibitors
- •Anastrozole
- •Exemestane
- •Letrozole
- •Toxicity of Aromatase Inhibitors
- •Adjuvant Therapy with Aromatase Inhibitors
- •Ovarian Suppression/Ablation
- •Suggested Readings
- •18. Neoadjuvant Therapy
- •Neoadjuvant Therapy Regimens
- •Patient Selection for Neoadjuvant Therapy
- •Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy and Surgery
- •Breast Conservation Rates
- •Local Recurrence Rates after Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy
- •Primary Surgery after Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy
- •Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy after Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy
- •Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy and Outcome
- •Does Earlier Delivery of Chemotherapy Improve Survival?
- •Can Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy Be Used as a Chemosensitivity Test?
- •Suggested Readings
- •19. Locally Advanced and Inflammatory Breast Cancer
- •Locally Advanced Breast Cancer
- •Diagnosis and Workup of Locally Advanced Breast Cancer
- •Treatment of Locally Advanced Breast Cancer
- •History of Treatment for Locally Advanced Breast Cancer
- •Induction Chemotherapy
- •Local Surgery after Induction Chemotherapy
- •Regional Surgery after Induction Chemotherapy
- •Inflammatory Breast Cancer
- •Diagnosis and Workup
- •Treatment of Inflammatory Breast Cancer
- •Suggested Readings
- •20. Surveillance of the Patient with Breast Cancer after Treatment
- •Patterns of Recurrence for Breast Cancer
- •Local Recurrence
- •Regional Recurrence
- •Distant Recurrence
- •Second Primary Breast Cancers
- •Nonbreast Cancers
- •Treatment-Related Toxicity
- •Surveillance for Patients with Breast Cancer
- •Recommended Follow-up for In Situ Cancer
- •Recommended Follow-up for Invasive Cancer
- •History
- •Physical Examination
- •Mammography
- •Referral for Genetic Counseling
- •Not Recommended Follow-up Studies
- •Blood Tests
- •Chest X-Rays
- •Computed Tomography Scans or Positron Emission Tomography Scans
- •Bone Scans
- •Magnetic Resonance Imaging of the Breast
- •Suggested Readings
- •21. Management of Breast Cancer Recurrence
- •Local Recurrence
- •Presentation of Local Recurrences
- •Diagnostic Workup of Local Recurrence
- •Treatment of Local Recurrence after Breast-Conserving Therapy
- •Treatment of Local Recurrence after Mastectomy
- •Management of the Axilla after Local Recurrence
- •Regional Recurrence
- •Treatment of Axillary Recurrence
- •Management of Supraclavicular Recurrence
- •Use of Systemic Therapy after Locoregional Recurrence
- •Surgery in Stage IV Disease
- •Patient Selection for Surgery
- •Resection of Specific Metastatic Sites
- •Lung Metastases
- •Liver Metastases
- •Brain Metastases
- •Bone Metastases
- •Breast Surgery in the Face of Stage IV Disease
- •Principles of Systemic Therapy for Metastatic Breast Cancer
- •Suggested Readings
- •22. Breast Cancer in Special Populations
- •Male Breast Cancer
- •Clinical Presentation and Workup
- •Treatment
- •Adjuvant Systemic Therapy
- •Breast Cancer in Pregnancy
- •Effect of Pregnancy on Breast Cancer
- •Diagnosis of Breast Cancer in Pregnant Women
- •Staging
- •Treatment
- •Breast Cancer in Older Patients
- •Breast Cancer among African American Women
- •Breast Cancer among Other Ethnicities
- •Suggested Readings
- •23. Other Tumors of the Breast
- •Phyllodes Tumors
- •Fibromatosis of the Breast
- •Sarcoma
- •Angiosarcoma of the Breast
- •Lymphoma
- •Metastases to the Breast
- •Suggested Readings
- •Subject Index

180 SURGICAL FOUNDATIONS: ESSENTIALS OF BREAST SURGERY
Understand the pros and cons of internal mammary sentinel lymph
node biopsy and describe the technique.
Be familiar with the arguments for and against the performance of a
completion node dissection when the sentinel lymph node is positive.
Be familiar with the complications of sentinel lymph node biopsy
and axillary lymph node dissection and their management.
Describe the management of lymphedema after breast surgery.
Introduction
Ever since the lymphatic system was identified
in the 17th century, scientists have surmised
an important association between the regional
lymph nodes and the development and progression of cancers of the breast. At that time,
Rene´Descartes proposed a lymph theory for
the origin of breast cancer in direct contrast
to the prevailing theory of the time: Galen’s
theory that cancer arose from an excess of
black bile in the body. The lymph theory of
cancer gained significant momentum in the
18th century when it was advocated by John
Hunter, the “Father of Scientific Surgery,”
suggesting that a coagulative defect in the
lymph ultimately led to the appearance of
breast cancer. Hunter called for the removal
of the cancer along with the potential areas
of lymphatic spread nearly 100 years earlier
than William Halsted.
The formal axillary lymph node dissection
(ALND) was introduced by Lorenz Heister in
the 19th century, although it was not quickly
adopted. In 1867, Charles Hewitt Moore wrote
a treatise titled, “On the Influence of Inadequate Operations on the Theory of Cancer,”
in which he described the importance of
removing involved axillary lymph nodes en
bloc with the cancer. He later went on to prescribe full axillary dissection for all patients
with breast cancer, noting that involved nodes
may not be detected clinically. The routine use
of axillary dissection was adopted by notable
surgeons such as Ernst G. F. Ku¨ster, Richard
von Volkmann, Joseph Lister, and Samuel D.
Gross, who reported a virtual elimination of
axillary recurrences when axillary clearance
was routinely performed.
Of course, it was Halsted who most radically
changed the surgical management of breast
cancer when he first described the radical
mastectomy in 1882. This operation called
not only for the removal of the breast and
both pectoral muscles, but also, based on the
reports of the aforementioned surgeons, an
extensive axillary dissection incorporating
levels I through III. Although the radical mastectomy was associated with significant postoperative deformity and diminished upper
extremity function, and the operative procedure itself resulted in significant intraoperative
blood loss, it had a dramatic impact on locoregional control and was quickly adopted. The
modified radical mastectomy (MRM), popularized by D. H. Patey in the 1930s, spared the
pectoral muscles while removing the breast and
axillary contents (levels I and II). Much less morbid than the radical mastectomy, this operation
eventually replaced the radical mastectomy
when long-term followup failed to demonstrate
any breast cancer recurrences in the preserved
pectoral muscles, rarely in the level III or interpectoral nodes, and no difference in survival
compared with radical mastectomy.
When it became apparent that the radical
mastectomy dramatically lowered locoregional
recurrence rates but had no significant impact
on overall survival, the relative impact that
local or regional control had on survival was
called into question. To help address these
questions, the National Surgical and Adjuvant
Breast Project (NSABP) was established by
Dr. Rudolph Noer under the supervision of the
National Cancer Institute (NCI). One of the
first trials that the NSABP conducted, NSABP
B-04, sought to specifically address the controversy surrounding the ideal management of
the axillary lymph nodes (NSABP B-06 would
address the ideal local management of breast
cancer, see Chapter 12). The NSABP B-04 trial,
conducted between July 1971 and September
1974, took patients with operable invasive
breast cancers and clinically negative nodes
(n ¼ 1079) and randomized them to one of
three arms: (1) total mastectomy with ALND;
(2) total mastectomy with postoperative radiation; and (3) total mastectomy with a delayed
axillary dissection only if clinically positive
axillary nodes developed. An additional 586
women with clinically positive nodes were
randomized to either radical mastectomy or

TABLE 13–1Results of the NSABP B04 Trial
Node negative Node positive
RM TM RM þ XRT RM TM þ XRT
Number of patients 362 365 352 292 294
OS at 25 yrs 25% 26% 19% 14% 14%
OS at 10 years 58% 54% 59% 38% 39%
OS at 5 years 75% 74% 75% 62% 58%
Of patients who were clinically node negative 19% underwent delayed axillary lymph node dissection for axillary
relapse (median time to development of positive axillary nodes 14.8 months).
Of patients who were clinically node positive randomized to TM þ XRT, 11.9% developed axillary relapse compared
to 1% in RM arm.
OS, overall survival; RM, radical mastectomy; TM, total mastectomy; TM þ XRT, total mastectomy and external
beam radiation.)
18113—REGIONAL MANAGEMENT OF BREAST CANCER
total mastectomy without axillary surgery, but
with postoperative radiation. Twenty-five-year
followup of the B-04 trial has demonstrated
no survival difference among either the nodenegative treatment groups or the node-positive
treatment groups (Table 13–1).
The NSABP B-04 trial did demonstrate the
necessity of surgical lymph node dissection in
identifying regional disease (clinical axillary
staging was incorrect in 25% to 40% of cases)
and also the superiority of surgical lymph node
dissection compared with axillary radiation for
local disease control among patients who were
clinically node positive. However, the trial also
revealed that the ALND as part of the surgical
management of breast cancer was not associated
with any survival benefit. Despite this finding,
surgical management did not change and axillary dissection remained the standard of care.
There were several reasons for this. Critics of
the study point out that the study was not powered to detect a small survival benefit to ALND,
and in the mastectomy alone, many of surgeons
still included a large number of axillary nodes
with the specimen. But the strongest reason that
ALND remained standard despite no evidence of
therapeutic benefit was that the prognostic
information provided by ALND was still crucial
for adjuvant therapy decisions. So while NSABP
B-06 dramatically altered the local management
of breast cancer NSABP-04 did not, as it was still
necessary to perform routine ALND to identify
patients who were node positive. However, this,
too, would change dramatically when sentinel
lymph node (SLN) biopsy for breast cancer
emerged.
In the 80s and 90s, axillary sampling was
being investigated as a means of staging the
axilla without subjecting patients to the complications of axillary clearance. During this
time, the use of intraoperative lymphatic
mapping was being investigated for other cancers as a method of accurately identifying the
first lymph node(s) that received drainage from
the site of a tumor. This was not a new concept.
In the mid-19th century, Virchow described the
concept of lymphatic drainage from a given
body site to a specific lymph node. Based on
studies in cats and humans with vital dye,
Braithwaite first described the “glands sentinel”
as the lymph node that drains a particular area.
In 1960, Gould described a “sentinel node” that
directly drained the parotid gland and proposed
that a radical neck dissection should be performed if this node contained micrometastatic
disease. And in 1976, Cabanas suggested that
the sentinel node of the penis could be used to
determine the need for regional node dissection
for penile cancer. However, the use of intraoperative lymphatic mapping to identify the sentinel node was truly brought forward by Donald
Morton for the treatment of malignant melanoma, where it was demonstrated to be highly
accurate in predicting the status of the regional
basin. In 1994, Giuliano first described the use
of SLN biopsy in breast cancer, prompting great
interest in using this technique in breast cancer
and numerous studies of SLN biopsy followed
by completion axillary lymph node dissection.
Management of the Patient with Clinically Node-Negative Breast Cancer
Although there are still several controversies
that exist regarding the ideal use of SLN biopsy,
it has become the standard method of identifying regional metastases in patients with
clinically node-negative breast cancer. The
ALND should no longer be considered for this

182 SURGICAL FOUNDATIONS: ESSENTIALS OF BREAST SURGERY
Patient with documented
invasive breast cancer
History and physical
Clinically
node negative
SLNBx
ALND
FNA Biopsy
FNA
positive
Clinically
suspicious nodes
1° tumor <1.0 cm
FNA
negative
purpose, except in cases in which SLN biopsy is
not possible. Outside ofthis scenario, the ALND
should be thought of as a therapeutic procedure
for patients with documented lymph node
involvement. However, before proceeding with
surgical management, a thorough evaluation
should be completed to identify patients with
regional involvement so that these patients
may be spared SLN biopsy and proceed directly
to axillary clearance (Fig. 13–1).
Noninvasive Axillary Assessment
If it has not already been done as part of the initial evaluation, any patient diagnosed with
breast cancer requires a detailed examination
of the regional lymph nodes, including the
axilla, supraclavicular, and cervical basins.With
the patient sitting up, the examination should
begin with the cervical lymph nodes along the
anterior border of the sternocleidomastoid
muscle. As the examiner moves downward, adenopathy should be sought in the supraclavicular fossa and possibly some infraclavicular
nodes within the deltopectoral groove. To
examine the axillary nodes, the examiner
should face the patient or stand slightly to his
or her side. The examiner uses the nonpalpating hand to either steady the patient’s shoulder
or support his or her arm, asking him or her to
let it go loose to relax the pectoralis major and
axillary fascia (Fig. 13–2). Examining the axilla
Figure 13–1. Clinical staging
of the axilla. Patients with palpable axillary lymph nodes should
undergo fine-needle aspiration
(FNA) biopsy to confirm metastases. Because palpable nodes
are not always involved by
cancer, a negative FNA should
prompt a sentinel lymph node
(SLN)biopsy, takingcare to excise
1° tumor >1.0 cm
Axillary ultrasound
with FNA biopsy of
suspicious nodes
FNA
negative
FNA
positive
ALND
any suspicious nodes regardless
of whether they take up the
tracer. For patients who are clinically node negative, axillary ultrasound and ultrasound-guided
FNA biopsy will identify many
patients who have regional metastases, allowing them to proceed
to axillary lymph node dissection
(ALND) or neoadjuvant chemotherapy. The size cutoff for the
routine use of axillary ultrasound
varies among institutions. At
the University of Michigan, all
patients with an invasive cancer
greater than 1 cm undergo routine axillary ultrasound.
without relaxation of the fascia will severely
limit the ability to detect palpable adenopathy.
Physical examination of the axilla involves
palpation of the anterior, deep, and posterior
axillary surfaces. Enlarged or firm nodes may
sometimes be detected on firm compression of
the axillary tissues against the smoother surface
of the pectoral muscles, the lateral chest wall, or
the subscapular musculature. The examination
should start high in the axilla. In this way, the
axillary nodes are trapped lower rather than
initially pushed upward. Gently palpate back
and forth to feel if any nodes are apparent. Several passes should be made from top to bottom,
both anteriorly and posteriorly in the axilla. If
any lymph nodes are detected, their size, consistency, and fixation should be noted.
It is important to acknowledge that physical
examination alone is highly inaccurate for clinical staging, lacking in both sensitivity and
specificity. Obviously micrometastatic disease
will not be identified on physical examination.
However, it is also possible to have a falsepositive finding. Normal lymph nodes can
sometimes be palpated depending on the body
habitus of the patient, and sometimes enlarged
lymph nodes are present in response to a previous breast biopsy. As many as 40% of clinically
positive examinations may be inaccurate, even
in experienced hands. Given that today women
who are node negative can be spared the morbidity of ALND, the impact of a false-positive

AB
Figure 13–2. A, B: Axillary examination. The examiner should face the patient or stand slightly to his or her
side. The examiner uses the nonpalpating hand to either steady the patient’s shoulder or support his or her
arm, asking him or her to let it go loose to relax the pectoralis major and axillary fascia. (From Roses D. Breast
Cancer. Philadelphia: Elsevier, 2005.)
18313—REGIONAL MANAGEMENT OF BREAST CANCER
physical examination can be significant. Therefore, fine-needle aspiration (FNA) biopsy should
be used to confirm the presence of metastatic
disease in any patient with breast cancer with
palpable axillary lymph nodes. This can be
done freehand or with ultrasound guidance.
If FNA confirms the presence of metastatic
disease, then when the patient proceeds to
lumpectomy or mastectomy, a level I and II
ALND should be performed. If the FNA is negative, however, ALND should not be the next
step. If the examiner is highly suspicious of
lymph node involvement and believes the
negative FNA is secondary to sampling error,
it may be worth performing an ultrasoundguided biopsy. In other cases, surgical lymph
node excisional biopsy can be performed if
the presence or absence of lymph node metastasis is a key component of the therapeutic
algorithm.
If the examiner is confident that the node
was sampled correctly, or the image-guided
biopsy is also negative, the patient should
undergo SLN biopsy at the time of their lumpectomy or mastectomy. It is crucial that the
surgeon also remove the palpable node at the
time of SLN biopsy, even if it does not demonstrate uptake of either the radioactive tracer or
blue dye and consider frozen section analysis
or imprint cytology to evaluate for metastases.
Axillary Ultrasound
In the patient with documented breast cancer
and no palpable adenopathy , imaging of the
axilla with ultrasound is rapidly becoming
standard practice for preoperative axillary assessment. Sensitivity of axillary ultrasound in identifying abnormal nodes ranges from 50% to 70%;
specificity is between 85% and 95%. When axillary FNA biopsy of abnormal lymph nodes is
added to axillary ultrasound, the sensitivity
increases to nearly 100% in some studies. Thepreoperative diagnosis of axillary metastasis is
extremely helpful in the staging and operative
planning of the patient with breast cancer . As
SLN biopsy is not an inexpensive procedure,
sparing patients with known lymph node metastases from the procedure not only simplifies
their treatment but also saves health care dollars.
It is also helpful in the preoperative staging and
patient selection of patients considered for
neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Several institutions
consider it common practice to routinely obtain
axillary ultrasounds on all patients with invasive
cancers greater than 1.0 cm.
There are several criteria by which a lymph
node is deemed suspicious on ultrasonography
(Table 13–2). Abnormal lymph nodes are identified by either their size or a change in their
general appearance on ultrasound (Figs. 13–3,
13–4, 13–5). Size is felt to be the weakest pre-
dictor of abnormality; normal nodes generally
measure between 4 and 6 mm in length, and
although nodes greater than 10 mm in length
are generally considered abnormal, changes
in morphology are significantly more useful
in diagnosing metastasis. Rounding of the normal elliptical shape is considered an indication
of neoplastic infiltration. Obliteration of the
normally hypoechoic nodal cortex, irregularities of the cortical or medullary contours, and

184 SURGICAL FOUNDATIONS: ESSENTIALS OF BREAST SURGERY
TABLE 13–2Features of a Suspicious
Lymph Node on Ultrasound
Increased size
Abnormal node adjacent to normal node (less
likely to be inflammation)
Rounded shape as opposed to normal ovoid
shape
Hypoechoic cortex
Loss of echogenic outer capsule and angular
margins
Cortical thickening: uniform versus eccentric
Hilar compression: uniform versus eccentric
Hilar indentation (“rat bite”)
Hilar displacement or obliteration
Hypervascular flow patterns
eccentric compression of the hyperechoic
nodal medulla are also suggestive of metastatic
disease. Loss of the nodal capsule is also an
indicator of tumor invasion. The addition of
color-flow Doppler may also enhance the diagnostic sensitivity of axillary ultrasound; hypervascularity and visualization of multiple
feeding vessels for a single lymph node are
Figure 13–4. Axillary lymph node demonstrates
asymmetric cortical thickening with flattening and
compression of the hilum. (Image courtesy of
Dr. Alexis Nees, Department of Radiology, University
of Michigan.)
strong indicators of neoplastic activity. Any
abnormal lymph nodes identified on axillary
ultrasound should undergo ultrasound-guided
FNA to confirm the presence of metastases.
Patients with FNA-proven regional disease
can be spared the time and expense of SLN
biopsy and proceed directly to ALND at the
time of their lumpectomy or mastectomy.
Figure 13–3. Axillary lymph node with symmetric
cortical thickening. (Image courtesy of Dr. Alexis
Nees, Department of Radiology, University of
Michigan.)
Contraindications to Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy
Patients with invasive cancer and no clinical
evidence of axillary disease are candidates for
SLN biopsy. As stated, patients with palpable
axillary nodes or suspicious lymph nodes on
axillary ultrasound should be initially evaluated
by FNA, with or without ultrasound guidance
(Box 13–1 and Box 13–2).
Besides the patient who is clinically node positive, are there other indications when SLN
biopsy is contraindicated? When SLN was first
introduced clinically, its use was limited to
small, unicentric invasive cancers. However,
the success rates and accuracy of the procedure
have subsequently been described in patient
populations in which SLN biopsy was considered contraindicated. These include patients
with multicentric cancers, patients with large

BOX 13–2 CONTROVERSIES IN THE
USE OF SENTINEL LYMPH NODE
BIOPSY
18513—REGIONAL MANAGEMENT OF BREAST CANCER
Figure 13–5. Lymph node on right demonstrates
round shape with compression of the fatty hilum.
Lymph node on left demonstrates loss of fatty hilum. Ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (FNA)
confirmed metastatic disease. (Image courtesy of
Dr. Alexis Nees, Department of Radiology, University
of Michigan.)
(>5 cm) primary tumors, and evenpatients with
previous axillary surgery or breast irradiation.
Many of these changes were prompted by alterations in the methodof injectionof the tracer. For
example, tumor size had been considered a possible contraindication to SLN biopsy. Most surgeons recommend SLN biopsy for patients with
clinically node-negative breast cancers with T1
and T2 tumors (less than 5 cm). However, SLN
biopsy has been shown to be accurate for
patients with larger tumors. On one hand, most
of these patients (as high as 75%) will have
regional metastases, so most will inevitably proceed to complete node dissection. On the other
hand, even if it is a minority of patients, it is
worth sparing these patients from the morbidity
BOX 13–1 ABSOLUTE
CONTRAINDICATIONS TO SENTINEL
LYMPH NODE BIOPSY
Clinically involved lymph nodes
(confirm by fine-needle aspiration)
Inflammatory breast cancer
Prophylactic
mastectomy
Ductal
carcinoma in
situ
Multicentric
breast cancer
Pregnancy Blue dye is
Previous
axillary
surgery
Pro: Staging of axilla
if incidental cancer is
detected.
Con: Low likelihood of
incidental cancer does not
justify the cost of the
procedure.
Pro: Staging of axilla if
incidental invasive cancer
is detected after
mastectomy.
Con: If invasion is
detected after
lumpectomy, a sentinel
lymph node (SLN) biopsy
can still be performed.
Con: Accuracy of SLN
biopsy is not verified for
multicentric cancer.
Pro: Studies of periareolar
injection suggest a
common drainage pattern
for all quadrants.
contraindicated because
of an allergic reaction.
Methylene blue has not
been studied.
Tc99 appears safe,
although some surgeons
are hesitant to use it.
Con: Disruption to
lymphatic pathways
makes the accuracy of the
procedure questionable.
Pro: Several studies have
demonstrated feasibility
of the approach.
of an ALND. These patients are obviously ideal
candidates for preoperative axillary ultrasound
with ultrasound-guided FNA biopsy of any
abnormal lymph nodes. If negative, a subset of
these patients will still benefit from SLN biopsy.
Many women with T3 tumors will be candidates
for neoadjuvant chemotherapy. How the sentinel node procedure should be incorporated with
neoadjuvant chemotherapyis discussed in detail
in Chapter 18. In any such case, however, it falls
on the judgment of the surgeon as to whether
SLN biopsy will give an accurate representation

186 SURGICAL FOUNDATIONS: ESSENTIALS OF BREAST SURGERY
of the nodal status. If there is reasonable concern, either before or during the procedure, then
ALND should be performed.
Another area of controversy is the use of
SLN with noninvasive breast cancer. Although
SLN biopsy is primarily indicated in patients
with invasive breast cancer, there are some
situations in which it may be considered in
patients with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS;
see Chapter 11). Patients undergoing mastectomy for DCIS are candidates for SLN biopsy.
This is primarily done as a method to stage
the axilla should an unexpected invasive component be identified within the mastectomy
specimen. If invasive cancer is incidentally identified in a patient with DCIS undergoing a simple mastectomy without SLN biopsy, the only
option for staging the axilla is a complete ALND.
Patients undergoing lumpectomy for DCIS do
not require SLN biopsy; if an invasive component is discovered, they may return to the
operating room.It is notunreasonable,however,
to consider SLN biopsy in patients with DCIS
undergoing breast conservation for whom there
is a strong clinical suspicion for an invasive
component, such as patients with DCIS presenting as a palpable mass or those with extensive
high-grade DCIS with comedonecrosis.
Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy
Surgical Technique
Injection of Tracers and Patient Preparation
Sentinel node biopsy is a multistep procedure,
involving perioperative localization followed
by intraoperative nodal excision. The method
of nodal localization has been a subject of
much investigation, using different timing
sequences, agents, and injection techniques
to determine the optimum procedure for identifying the sentinel node.
The initial description of the sentinel node
procedure used blue dye only as a method of
localizing the SLN. Today, the most common
approach to SLN biopsy is the use of a combination of tracers, which had most commonly
consisted of technetium 99-m (Tc99) and Lymphazurin (isosulfan blue dye). With recent difficulties in obtaining Lymphazurin, many
surgeons have shifted to the use of Methylene
blue dye. The application of both a nuclear
tracer and blue dye does increase the sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of sentinel node
identification. However, use of blue dye alone
has a sentinel node identification rate ranging
from 77% to 92%, making sentinel node
biopsy feasible in facilities that lack nuclear
medicine capabilities.
The timing and technique of the injection of
these tracers for sentinel node localization has
been extensively researched. The procedure
typically begins with the injection of the Tc99;
a radiotracer bound to a colloid substance that
travels through the lymphatic system. Sulfur
colloid is the molecule commonly used in the
United States;albumin is often the preferred compound overseas. In the United States, Tc-99m
sulfur colloid is available as unfiltered or filtered, having been passed through a 22-mm
filter. The uptake and travel time depend on
the size of the labeled carrier and the amount
of carrier fluid used. Larger particles may never
make it to the nodes, whereas small particles
may go too quickly, possibly resulting in multiple positive nodes. Filtration eliminates much
of the heterogeneity found in the sulfur colloid
molecules, theoretically producing a more concentrated and easily localized radioactive signal
when explored with a gamma probe. Filtration
through 100- or 220-nm filters has been studied, with goals of particle sizes ranging from
50 to 200 nm. A number of studies have been
performed, examining the clinical benefit of
using filtered versus unfiltered Tc-99m. The
results have failed to demonstrate a clear
advantage of one over the other. Selection
may depend on the relative advantages and disadvantages, including when the injection is
performed (day of versus night before).
Often the injections are performed the morning of the surger y, with lymphoscintigraphy
performed 2 hours after injection. This can
complicate surgical scheduling because cases
involving SLN biopsies cannot begin until late
morning. Several studies have demonstrated
no difference in node identification rates using
Tc-99m between 2 and 24 hours after injection,
a fact that often simplifies the logistics of scheduling surgery by allowing the injection to take
place the night before.
The technique of injection for sentinel node
localization has also been examined by several
institutions for both the radioactive colloid and
the blue dye. Originally, injections were always
performed peritumorally based on the concept
that this would be the most accurate anatomically. The peritumoral injection involves injection of the tracer in the breast parenchyma
surrounding the tumor or the cavity from the
excisional biopsy. However, this requires that
the person injecting the tracer (often a nuclear

TABLE 13–3Relative Advantages of Different Injection Techniques
Pros Cons
Intraparenchymal
(peritumoral)
Dermal Rapid lymphatic uptake
Subareolar or
periareolar
Conceptually the “purest” mapping route in
replicating intramammary lymphatic path from
breast tumor to sentinel node(s)
More likely to map to internal mammary lymph
nodes (IMNs)
Easier with nonpalpable tumors, but requires
marking of skin overlying lesion less shine
through
Rapid lymphatic uptake
Less shine through
Can be used for cases of multiple breast tumors
Does not require knowledge of tumor location
Possibly more physiologic, based on embryologic
lymphatic system development
Difficult for nonpalpable tumors
Risk of injecting into breast cavity
Where to inject for multiple tumors
Shine-through effect for Tc99 for
upper outer quadrant tumors
Where to inject for multiple tumors
May require image-guided
marking of skin site overlying
nonpalpable tumor
Blue tattooing of skin
Risk of necrosis with methylene
blue dye
Less identification of internal
mammary nodes
“Blue breast” syndrome
Risk of necrosis with methylene
blue dye
Less identification of IMNs
18713—REGIONAL MANAGEMENT OF BREAST CANCER
medicine technician) knows where the tumor is,
which for nonpalpable lesions can be an issue.In
addition, accidental injection into the cavity
results in a failure of localization. Subsequent
studies have shown that other methods of injection are equally accurate, if not more so. Periareolar, subareolar, and intradermal injections
have all been used in various studies with both
blue dye and radioactive colloid (Table 13–3).
Intradermal injections still require knowledge
of the tumor location, and unless the skin overlying the tumor is resected, will leave residual
radiation and blue dye. For tumors in the upper
outer quadrant, false gamma countersignals, colloquially referred to as “shine through” from a
peritumoral or intradermal Tc99 injection can
make identification of the SLN difficult. Many
surgeons advocate periareolar or subareolar
injections for the radioactive colloid. This simplifies the procedure because the person injecting the tracer does not need to know where in
the breast thetumor is. Thisalso avoids the shine
through phenomenon for upper outer quadrant
tumors.
Lymphoscintigraphy
The use of routine lymphoscintigraphy is controversial in breast cancer lymphatic mapping
(Fig. 13–6). If the surgeon is prepared to go
after internal mammary lymph nodes should
they take up the tracer, then lymphoscintigraphy is essential. The tracer should also be
injected peritumorally because intradermal
and periareolar injections rarely demonstrate
INJ
A
Figure 13–6. A, B: Lymphoscintigrams showing uptake in ipsilateral axillary lymph nodes after periareolar
injection of Tc99.
INJ
B

188 SURGICAL FOUNDATIONS: ESSENTIALS OF BREAST SURGERY
internal mammary lymph nodes. Otherwise,
the lymphoscintigraphy does not appear to
be necessary or helpful in identifying the sentinel node. Cost and reimbursement issues,
however, dictate that if nuclear medicine is
going to be doing the injection of the radioactive colloid, then they must also perform lymphoscintigraphy. If lymphoscintigraphy is to
be eliminated, then in most cases the surgeon
will have to assume the responsibility for the
storage and disposal of the radioactive substances and waste.
Sentinel Lymphadenectomy
Once the patient is in the operating room, injection of the blue dye takes place. Although many
surgeons use isosulfan blue dye for this, the
recent difficulties in obtaining Lymphazurin
have led to many surgeons to use methylene
blue instead, and in many cases liking it better
than Lymphazurin, citing lower cost, fewer allergic reactions, and similar efficacy. If isosulfan
blue dye is used, allergic reactionis an important
complication of the procedurefor the surgeon to
keep in mind during this portion of the procedure and to discuss preoperatively with the
patient. Allergic reactions can occur in 1% to
2% of patients. Most of these involve urticaria,
blue hives, or pruritus, however about 0.5%
may have bronchospasm and hypotension. If
the patient is undergoing general anesthesia, it
is reasonable to delay the injection of the blue
dye until the airway is secured. Allergic reaction
should be considered in any patient experiencing hypotension in which blue dye was used
and is readily managed with fluid resuscitation
and short-term pressor support.
Methylene blue does not carry the same risk of
allergic reaction, however, it does carry the risk
of skin necrosis. For this reason, it should be
diluted with normal saline. The recommended
dilution is 2 ml of methylene blue dye and 3 ml
of normal saline. It is also advisable to not perform an intradermal injection of the methylene
blue dye, using peritumoral injections only.
The method of injection for the blue dye
can be peritumoral, intradermal, or subareolar.
Multiple studies suggest the superiority of
intradermal injection compared to subdermal
or deeper peritumoral breast injections. Injection of the dermal lymphatics is felt to drain
the marker faster to the axilla than injection
into the breast parenchyma. However, intradermal or subareolar injections of blue dye
may cause tattooing of the nipple or skin,
which may persist for months in patients
undergoing breast conservation. In the case
of methylene blue dye, skin necrosis is a significant complication as well. In a patient undergoing a mastectomy, either an intradermal or
subareolar injection of the blue dye seems
ideal. For the patient undergoing lumpectomy,
intradermal injection can be used if the overlying skin will be resected with the tumor.
Otherwise a peritumoral injection of the blue
dye will provide adequate localization without
leaving the breast tattooed for an extended
period of time. Care must be taken to avoid
injecting the blue dye into a cavity after an
excisional biopsy. After injection, the breast is
gently massaged for approximately 5 minutes.
Nodal excision is typically performed via a
small axillary incision, posterior to the lateral
border of the pectoral muscle. Preoperative
scanning with the gamma probe is often helpful in planning the incision. The incision
should be easily incorporated into an incision
for a subsequent ALND (Fig. 13–7). Nodes that
stained blue or with attached blue lymphatic
Biopsy site
Point of
maximum
radioactivity
Figure 13–7. The gamma probe isused to identifythe point ofmaximum counts. A small incision should be made
here, being sure it can be easily incorporated into an incision for a subsequent axillary lymph node dissection.

Figure 13–8. In vivo image of a sentinel lymph
node taking up blue dye. A node is considered a sentinel lymph node if it is blue, partially blue, or has a
blue stained lymphatic leading to it. (Image courtesy
of Dr. Tara Breslin, Department of Surgery, University of Michigan.)
channels, or with evidence of radioactivity on
the gamma probe, are excised intact and sent
in formalin for pathologic review (Fig. 13–8).
In addition, nodes that are palpably firm or
enlarged should also be excised. The procedure
is considered complete after scanning with the
gamma probe fails to reveal further radioactive
counts greater than 10% of the highest count
detected.
In some cases the lymphoscintigraphy will
demonstrate uptake in the internal mammary
lymph nodes (IMNs; Fig. 13–9). The routine
INJ
Figure 13–9. Lymphoscintigraphy showing uptake
in the internal mammary nodes.
BOX 13–3 ARGUMENTS FOR AND
AGAINST ROUTINE EXPLORATION
AND BIOPSY OF INTERNAL
MAMMARY LYMPH NODE UPTAKE
ON LYMPHOSCINTIGRAPHY
For:
The presence of metastases in the
internal mammary lymph node (IMN)
provides critical staging information
and may impact adjuvant therapy.
Possibly more prognostic than axillary
nodes.
Preventing IMN recurrence is crucial
as this can be difficult to manage
clinically.
Against:
Technically challenging, risk of
pneumothorax.
Many patients with IMN uptake on
lymphoscintigram will not have
identifiable sentinel lymph node (SLN)
at surgery.
Few patients with IMN uptake have
tumor involvement (0% to 6%) and many
also have axillary involvement, hence
impact on adjuvant therapy decisions is
negligible.
biopsy of these nodes has become a point of
much contention. Between 5% and 10% of
patients undergoing lymphoscintigraphy will
have evidence of radioactivity at the ipsilateral
IMN chain. This is partly dependent on the
method of injection. Internal mammary drainage is more commonly seen after peritumoral
injection and much less so after subareolar or
intradermal injection. In patients who drain
only to the IMN, or to both the IMN and axillary nodes, the surgeon should consider each
patient individually, considering the possible
impact on subsequent therapy decisions should
IMN metastases be identified (Box 13–3). A further discussion of the IMNs is presented later in
this chapter.
Intraoperative Evaluation of the Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy
Intraoperative evaluation of sentinel nodes
has been investigated in a number of studies,
in hopes of sparing patients from multiple
operations for axillary staging and clearance.
Frozen section analysis of SLNs has proved to
be accurate for identifying macrometastatic
lesions, however, this adds considerable time
18913—REGIONAL MANAGEMENT OF BREAST CANCER
Соседние файлы в папке Библиотека им академика М.И. Перельмана
